Because of our close connection to animals biologically (evolution) and spiritually in the re-birthprocess, the Buddha was opposed to violence towards animals. An understanding andacceptance of the theory of evolution is important because without that acceptance there is aperception of a great separation between humans and animals which simply is not true.Michael Shermer, the founder of The Skeptic Society and Skeptic magazine has written about theimportance of the acceptance of biological evolution and ranks Darwin‘s work as the single mostimportant contribution in history. I concur with him that Darwin‘s research is the greatestfinding in history for its potential at changing world views. It changed (or eventually willchange) the world view that there is a complete separation between humans and animals. Astime goes on, people will realize that it is not even just a biological connection. If we areanimals as evolution shows us, then animals must also have a soul if humans do (or Buddhanatureor capacity for enlightenment or any other spiritual terminology). There is no way aroundit since we all evolved from the same source.

Once we realize that animals are our relatives, albeit in the distant past to a common ancestor,nevertheless, relatives, we do not want to inflict as much harm and violence to animals and theenvironment in general. In the Eightfold Middle Path the Buddha advises us not to kill orcause to kill and not to hold an occupation which involves killing animals or handling flesh, suchas a butcher.

There are some Buddhist writings which specifically prohibit the eating of meat and there areothers that seem to allow it. The most popular of the verses that seems to suggest meat eating asbeing acceptable is a suggestion by the Buddha that monks and nuns should eat what is servedthem in their alms bowls. The monks and nuns were advised to graciously accept what is servedin their food bowls from a lay person. ―Beggars can‘t be choosers‖ applies in the case of monksand nuns, but for the vast majority of followers who are lay people, a conscious decisionmust be made. Therefore, many Buddhists (but certainly not all - about half), have chosen avegetarian diet. (Based on surveys, including Snyder, 1986, 1987, 1989)

The following are some common questions and points Buddhists from all traditions have madeagainst vegetarianism. Answers are provided to each and every one of their ―points‖ to showthat the Buddha‘s path is about compassion and at least leans towards vegetarian diets.

Q. Didn’t the Buddha eat meat?A. This is a claim sometimes made by Buddhists of all traditions. There appear to be somereferences about the Buddha eating choice foods which could include meat before he wasenlightened, while he was living in the palace. This is before he made the great renunciation andleft the householder‘s life and became a recluse (monk). Even after enlightenment he may haveate some meat as monks and nuns are expected to abide by the Threefold rule where they acceptwhat is offered to them.

His final meal before enlightenment is reported to be rice cooked in milk (which is vegetarian).He ate boiled rice, grains and bread just before enlightenment (Majjhima Nikaya 36.33). TheBuddha defines delicious foods as choice hill rice with curry (Sutta 7, Majjhima Nikaya). Inanother sutra, Buddha and Ananda compare the teachings to a sweet honey ball which consists offlour, ghee, molasses, and honey (Sutta 18, Majjhima Nikaya). Here is a passage that specificallymentions vegetarian foods:―So the Blessed One early in the morning put on his robes and, carrying his bowl and outerrobe, went together with the community of monks to the cowherd's home. On arrival, he sat downon a seat made ready. The cowherd, with his own hand, served and satisfied the community ofmonks headed by the Blessed One with thick milk-rice porridge and fresh ghee. Then, when theBlessed One had eaten and had removed his hand from his bowl, the cowherd took a lower seatand sat to one side. As he was sitting there, the Blessed One, instructed, urged, roused, andencouraged him with a talk on Dhamma, then got up from his seat and left.Khuddaka Nikaya, Udana 4.3

After enlightenment two merchants offered the Buddha gruel made from barley meal with honeythat is rolled into balls (Vinaya 1.4). Most of the time his food was very simple, the staple foodwas rice gruel. The Buddha even made a list about the advantages of rice gruel, stating that itdispels hunger, quenches thirst, regulates wind, cleanses the bowels, and helps digestion(Anguttara Nikaya 5.21). Even when his food was not that simple, but rather ―choice it wasstill vegetarian as at one time he ate ―choice rice, many sauces and curries (Majjhima Nikaya77.9).

There appears to be one place, and apparently only this one place, where he is described aseating meat. At A.III,49 it mentions that the Buddha was once served sukaramamsa (Pali) withjujube fruit. The term mamsa = meat or flesh. The sutta mentions that the Buddha ate "out ofpity" apparently suggesting that he wanted to please the layman by accepting his food.In the Khuddaka Nikaya, Vimanavatthu (Stories of the Mansions), there are stories ofmeritorious deeds done by lay people who then ascended to a deva realm. Many of themeritorious deeds were giving alms food to the Buddha or one of his monks. Here we findseveral examples of only vegetarian food either given to the Buddha or one of his chief monkdisciples, Moggallana or Sariputta.

In the book that follows the Vimanavatthu, the Petavatthu, there are stories of beings in the realmof hungry ghosts (a lower realm, lower rebirth) and Moggallana suveys the area to find out whatmade them get there. In one passage it states, ―This woman ate meat and deceived with a lyingword. (Petavatthu 3.4) In another passage from the Petavatthu, a hunter kills deer and sharesthe meat with children every time he arrives back in town. In spite of the generosity (whichnormally leads to good rebirth), he is reborn as a hungry ghost, apparently because of the killingof deer and handling the flesh. (Petavatthu 3.1) The Petavatthu also contains verses showingthat the Buddha was offered vegetarian foods (abbreviated Petav. below) which he ate.List of vegetarian foods mentioned in the Pali Canon which the Buddha ate:

The bhikkhuni (nun), Rohini offered sweet cakes to a previous Buddha and was reborn in goodfamilies after that and eventually was reborn during the Buddha‘s time and became a nun andattained enlightenment (Psalms of the Early Buddhists 67, Pali Text Society translation).In one of the Buddha‘s past lives, when he was a crane, he even refused to kill to eat fish, byeating only those fish which were already dead from natural causes. (Jataka 1.206-8) If this wasthe level of his interest in not being part of the killing as a carnivorous animal, we can onlyimagine how much greater the compassion would be as an enlightened human.

At his final days in the parinibbana sutta, the food that led to his death was at one time translatedas pork. The terms have been translated as ―pig‘s truffles‖ which was originally mistranslated aspork. Modern scholars including, Arthur Waley, K. E. Neumann, and Mrs. Rhys David havecorrected this to ―the food of pigs‖ which are mushrooms. Today, the majority of Buddhistscholars agree that the Buddha ate mushrooms, which may have been poisonous and led to hisdeath at the age of 80. Or it could simply have been the size of the meal that led to his death asthere is evidence that the Buddha was already suffering from digestive problems well beforeeating the final meal (from previous suttas where the Buddha was ill and then recovered).However, the Buddha eats from the dish and requests for the remaining amount to be buried,apparently knowing that the food was in some way tainted and not simply a large meal. Thissuggests that the food was in some way not fit to eat, such as the wrong type of mushrooms.Further evidence that the Buddha did not eat pork can be seen in the fact that Cunda was ablacksmith, the one who offered the final meal to the Buddha. On a recent trip to India I learnedfrom a Hindu-Buddhist scholar that the three highest castes do not eat pork or other foods frompig meat. As a blacksmith, he was a member of the third caste and therefore, could not haveprepared pork.

According to Buddhism, the three most important foods served to the Buddha were the finalmeal (discussed above), most likely mushrooms, the meal just before enlightenment, which wasthe milk rice served by Sujata, and the meal right after enlightenment, which was barley mealhoney balls. All three of these meals were vegetarian.

Q. What about the famous three-fold rule that the Buddha allowed meat eating if one didnot hear, see, or order the animal to killed for one’s consumption.A. The main premise behind the three-fold rule is to graciously accept what one receives in yourbowl when going for alms round. This rule was meant and spoken to monks and nuns, not to laypeople. ―Beggars can‘t be choosers in modern terms. So for the vast majority of Buddhistswho are lay people, a conscious decision must be made.

In the Pali scriptures and the Sanskrit Mahayana scriptures (Buddha‘s discourses) there are manyreferences to the Buddha‘s compassion for animals and his wish for animals not to be killed,including statements in the Dhammapada and other suttas about how all animals do not wish tobe killed and how we should avoid killing at all possible costs. The Buddha was most concernedabout intent. If we accidentally kill and there is no intent, then there is no negative kammaaccumulated. But, if we purchase meat at a grocery store, can we honestly say that we do notintend for another animal to be killed?

The monks and nuns were required to go on alms rounds for their foods during the time of theBuddha. So this apparently removed some of the ―intent. But lay people must choose and canmake a conscious decision at the grocery. The butcher and slaughter house workers are justdoing the dirty work for the demand raised from the grocery stores by the consumers.Ven. Abhinaya, an English-born Theravada monk has said, ―To use scripture to justify thedisgusing and cruel habit of eating meat is both dishonest and unworthy. I‘ve never been ableto reconcile the preaching of Metta-Karuna (loving-kindness and compassion) with thepractice of meat eating; they contradict each other. And as to seeing, hearing, or suspectingthat the animal was killed especially for someone, well, for whom is the animal killed if not forthose who eat its flesh? No amount of twisting, juggling and verbal gymnastics can getaround that. (Shabkar.org, Taking a Stand)

Maybe it is usefull to make also some connections to non-greed and non-delusion in regard of Vegetarianism. Of course it needs a lot more effort and time to transport and to get the message for a real non-violence solution.People love non-violence but do not like non-greed and they love -ism but aren't much interested in non-delusion.

Maybe something that needs some good extra work for the modern approach of Theravada in the "modern" world.

Just that! *smile*...We Buddhists must find the courage to leave our temples and enter the temples of human experience, temples that are filled with suffering. If we listen to Buddha, Christ, or Gandhi, we can do nothing else. The refugee camps, the prisons, the ghettos, and the battlefields will become our temples. We have so much work to do. ... Peace is Possible! Step by Step. - Samtach Preah Maha Ghosananda "Step by Step" http://www.ghosananda.org/bio_book.html

BUT! it is important to become a real Buddhist first. Like Punna did: Punna Sutta Nate sante baram sokham _()_